db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Thomas Vandahl wrote
> On 20.09.2012 08:45, Thomas Fox wrote:
> > Ok, but remember that the module documentation is NOT maintained in the
> > modules themselves, but in the site module. I'd guess that the module's
> > site would not help the user but add confusion. Perhaps a README would
be
> > ok which points to the online site ?
>
> As I see it, I'd expect at least some JavaDoc packaged with the
> binaries. That said, I'm in favour of maintaining the module
> documentation with the module. Maven can then build a multi-site from
> this. I'm currently trying to achieve the same for some Fulcrum modules
> and will report back once I'm successful.
Hm, the single modules contained their documentation in their site
directory a while ago. However, this made it very difficult to have a
well-structured site for the whole project.
I tried for some time and then abandoned it. I'd favour a well-structured
online site above having documentations in the binary distributions.
Also, the modules are too interwoven for a separate documentation. E.g. it
makes no sense to describe the runtime without referring to the generated
classes.
In my experience, noone will use the binary distributions anyway because
everybody will use maven or ivy to pull the artifacts from a maven
repository.
It would even ok for me if we would not create binary releases at all but
only distribute maven artifacts... But then some people may cling to the
good old way of building applications...
> > There is the source distribution for all modules
> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachetorque-059/org/apache/torque/torque/4.0-beta1/
> > torque-4.0-beta1-source-release.zip
> >
> > Is this what you were looking for ?
> > Or did you mean we need an extra source distribution for every
modulke ?
>
> Reading
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release#what-must-every-release-contain I
> don't see any hard requirement for separate source distributions per
> module. However, I somehow expected to see the source distributions in
> the different artifact directories. I cannot tell why. Perhaps because
> others do it that way. Maybe we could ask our friends@derby for advice.
Again, who would use such distributions ? I'd guess we'd put effort into
something which noone uses. Besides, the modules depend on each other, you
would typically need to download more than one such separate distribution.
Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org